Remove ads

Belated Battleships (KanColle) [REHOST]

Reader mode
Burning Baron said:
Just don't say that to their faces, unless you want to deal with the crying.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Why? The shipgirls don't seem excessively bothered by it.

The regular girls, on the other hand...

LudicrousSpeedGo said:
That's not much- at least for general life. It's replacing long distance cruise consumables and combat losses that eats supplies.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I was trying to make a funny.

theJMPer said:
And that's a pretty low-end estimate too.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Wait a sec, it is, isn't it?

According to you...

theJMPer said:
Vestal rasped out a thoroughly-aged laugh. "I can imagine that. What's that girl eat, quarter-million a day?"
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Yipes. I think we can call this a fair order-of-magnitude estimate.
 
This is not part of my fairy-napping research, but what would be the result of the US building WW2 era destroyers again, but adding more BIG generators, and swapping 5 inch guns with railguns. With optical sights.
 
MagisterAurelius said:
Speaking of things that no non-government entity should be in control of (and one of my little projects has this as background). The US Navy has a slight problem in a KanColle universe. All those nukes that they've misplaced, sitting on the bottom of the ocean for any enterprising Abyssal princess to get her mitts on. Stick one of those in a fault line crack or something just off the California coast, set it off and watch the ensuing earthquake, underwater rockslide and tsunami with radioactive fallout in it work.

Yeah, my mind sometimes goes full apocalyptic at times. :whistle:
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
*Twitch* It... would not work like that. Leaving aside that those nukes would be next to useless after even a few months underwater, let alone years (nuclear devices are very finicky and the smallest amount of damage will leave them inoperable), there's a lot more there. The sheer tectonic forces on a fault pretty much renders the effect of a nuke nil. We actually generate earthquakes all the time nowadays... which involve water under pressure being injected into fault lines either by fracking (very, very small quakes that are pretty much unnoticeable) or by building hydroelectric dams whose reservoirs get high enough to force water into cracks.

Landslides and tsunamis are also near impossible. The US Navy actually tried to generate them on purpose way back with the idea of using them as a WMD just in case. They only managed waves of less then a foot high over a very local area with near nuke sized explosions. The thing about a tsunamis is that their size and range depend greatly on exactly how much volume of water is being displaced by whatever. For example, in the Indian Ocean Tsunami you had massive amounts of water displaced when the seabed suddenly thrust upward by several meters over a wide area.
 
Farmerbob1 said:
This is not part of my fairy-napping research, but what would be the result of the US building WW2 era destroyers again, but adding more BIG generators, and swapping 5 inch guns with railguns. With optical sights.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I'm pretty sure that result will be all involved in this project will convert to Cult Mechanicus. Because it's 40k-grade shizo-tech.


In other news, do any of you want to thoroughly explore Yamato?
VR Battleship Yamato
 
Last edited:
MagisterAurelius said:
Speaking of things that no non-government entity should be in control of (and one of my little projects has this as background). The US Navy has a slight problem in a KanColle universe. All those nukes that they've misplaced, sitting on the bottom of the ocean for any enterprising Abyssal princess to get her mitts on. Stick one of those in a fault line crack or something just off the California coast, set it off and watch the ensuing earthquake, underwater rockslide and tsunami with radioactive fallout in it work.

Yeah, my mind sometimes goes full apocalyptic at times. :whistle:
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

To add in to what @Harry Leferts said, Nukes actually aren't that volatile. Technically speaking, a nuclear weapon doesn't detonate, it initiates. It's a subtle but significant point there. Yes, explosives can be used to initiate a nuclear reaction, but that has to be done in a very specific way, and if you do it wrong, you get an explosion and the scattering of radioactive dust (from the plutonium in the warhead) and that's it.

And to prevent something like this happening, warheads on Trident II SLBMs are armed by accelerometers. These are devices that detect acceleration - from falling down on something from very high up - and then once specific acceleration has been recorded by the accelerometer, only then will the warhead arm. A zero-zero arming and initiation isn't happening.

That said, all this assumes that the nukes haven't been crushed like nothing at the bottom of the ocean or rusted all away. ICBMs aren't the hardiest of things - a USAF Minuteman once set itself on fire because a mechanic dropped a wrench on it.
 
Last edited:
Farmerbob1 said:
This is not part of my fairy-napping research, but what would be the result of the US building WW2 era destroyers again, but adding more BIG generators, and swapping 5 inch guns with railguns. With optical sights.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Not that helpful. Levelling effect translates things in terms of what modern stuff is relative to 2015 against what shipgirl stuff was relative to 1945.

Thus, the F-22 can go one on one against an Abyssal Me-262 (if there were such a thing as an Abyssal Me-262), because the former is the world's preeminent 2015 fighter, and the latter was the world's preeminent 1945 fighter. The F-22 would cut Abyssal Zeroes or Wildcats to ribbons, because that's what an Me-262 would have done in 1945. An F-16 performs less impressively (say, on par with a mid-war Spitfire/Mustang/FW-190/whatever). A singularly un-impressive fighter aircraft by modern standards (say, an F-111 or a MiG-21) would perform like a Brewster Buffalo or something.

Likewise, an AEGIS destroyer has a superb surface to air punch that can devastate even massed Abyssal plane attacks, because they'd do the same thing to massed air attacks by modern jet fighters. But B-52s doing high altitude bombing against Abyssal ships works about as well as B-17s doing the same thing would have worked in 1945: that is, not very well at all.

So a modern destroyer armed with railguns using optical sights is, by 2015 standards, a destroyer with great armor penetration, lousy fire control, and negligible protection. Against shipgirls, that translates into it having great armor penetration by the standards of destroyer guns, lousy fire control, and negligible protection.

It'd be like arming a real-life WWII destroyer with the five-inch version of that era's crude HEAT or APCR antitank rounds. It wouldn't make them a match for a battleship.

...

There is basically no way to 'cheat' past the leveling effect by somehow being really really clever about exactly which pieces of modern technology you use. It is just not a thing that can happen. We had a guy who used to post in this thread constantly obsessing over ways to do this, and he made himself amazingly unpopular in the process because he didn't get it.
 
Whiskey Golf said:
That said, all thise assumes that the nukes haven't been crushed like nothing at the bottom of the ocean or rusted all away. ICBMs aren't the hardiest of things - a USAF Minuteman once set itself on fire because a mechanic dropped a wrench on it.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Oh hell, you wanna know what one way for disposing of a nuclear bomb is? Blow it up. Just slap a C4 charge on it, and detonate the C4 charge. Even if you get a sympathetic detonation of the explosives inside the nuke, the shockwave profile will be wrong, and the supercritical reaction won't initiate.
 
PAGDTenno said:
Oh hell, you wanna know what one way for disposing of a nuclear bomb is? Blow it up. Just slap a C4 charge on it, and detonate the C4 charge. Even if you get a sympathetic detonation of the explosives inside the nuke, the shockwave profile will be wrong, and the supercritical reaction won't initiate.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Well yeah you could do that, blow up ICBMs in their silos, but I'd like to think the US military would have been more environmentally concerned about decommissioning its nukes. yanno. The Pantex Plant is a thing, afterall. :V
 
Whiskey Golf said:
That said, all this assumes that the nukes haven't been crushed like nothing at the bottom of the ocean or rusted all away. ICBMs aren't the hardiest of things - a USAF Minuteman once set itself on fire because a mechanic dropped a wrench on it.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Most of the nukes that have been lost at sea are gravity bombs though, not missile warheads. Those probably have a substantially heavier crush depth. An accidental detonation isn't a concern at all, for reasons already given, but someone managing to recover it (or more accurately, the nuclear material within it since all the parts to make it go boom have probably been pretty corroded) is. Particularly a number of weapons lost in the 1950s and 60s, before anti-theft/safety features like PALs were installed.
 
obssesednuker said:
Most of the nukes that have been lost at sea are gravity bombs though, not missile warheads. Those probably have a substantially heavier crush depth. An accidental detonation isn't a concern at all, for reasons already given, but someone managing to recover it (or more accurately, the nuclear material within it since all the parts to make it go boom have probably been pretty corroded) is. Particularly a number of weapons lost in the 1950s and 60s, before anti-theft/safety features like PALs were installed.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I wouldn't worry about that. Radioactve material decays, and nukes require tritium boosters to initiate. Those tritium boosters have a much shorter half-life than the uranium/plutonium that comprises the main... charge, I suppose.
 
PAGDTenno said:
Radioactve material decays,
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Plutonium has a half-life of 25,000 years. That is plenty of time for someone to find one of those lost weapons.

and nukes require tritium boosters to initiate.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

The creation of an improvised nuclear device would just require one to steal the plutonium/uranium core, as it would be something akin to the Fat Man: simplistically put, just shaped charges compressing the plutonium core into supercriticality. With the exception of the plutonium, all the necessary components can be easily acquired on the open market. The needed tools for building the relevant fuses, machining the explosive lenses, and so on and so forth has been accessible to the general public since the 1960s. The expertise is pretty common now-a-days too. If the core is a uranium one, you could even go for a gun-type bomb, which is even easier to build. The big barrier has always been acquiring the weapons-grade plutonium and/or uranium.

Now, if one wants to try and go for a more sophisticated boosted fission weapon (or even a full thermonuclear device), your going to need much more expertise in terms of personnel and even more expensive precision engineering equipment... but again, besides the plutonium, we're not talking about anything that would be actually illegal here. Even tritium can be bought on the open market.
 
Last edited:
don't you think that if the abyssal had nukes they'd have used them given that the wars been going on for a couple of years now.
 
Kentucky: HOW DO YOU LIKE ME NOW?! :mad:

(Kentucky is the leading candidate for being the RE-class, I think? She was going to be a missile battleship at one point, with a nuke option in the payload.)
 
Last edited:
Yeah I was thinking about the gravity bombs and nuclear depth charges and the radioactive material within them. And the likelihood of it happening in BelaBatt is nil, but I get to thinking about how to really screw the US Navy over in a KanColle setting it comes up. Not to mention one of the first ships the Navy would probably try to summon via specific request would be Glomar Explorer to go search and retrieve the packages the Navy has a decent idea where they ended up on the ocean floor. But that's just my mental wargaming and background canon for a project I have.
 
MagisterAurelius said:
Yeah I was thinking about the gravity bombs and nuclear depth charges and the radioactive material within them. And the likelihood of it happening in BelaBatt is nil, but I get to thinking about how to really screw the US Navy over in a KanColle setting it comes up. Not to mention one of the first ships the Navy would probably try to summon via specific request would be Glomar Explorer to go search and retrieve the packages the Navy has a decent idea where they ended up on the ocean floor. But that's just my mental wargaming and background canon for a project I have.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Depending on the yield and type, gravity bombs range from 70 kilotons to 1 megaton (ala B43). Note, however, that the W44 nuclear depth charge for the nuke ASROC has a warhead of only 10 kilotons. *shrug*

The thing is, most of those lost bombs and warheads have spent decades on the bottom of the ocean floor. They're not really going to be in useable condition.
 
obssesednuker said:
Most of the nukes that have been lost at sea are gravity bombs though, not missile warheads. Those probably have a substantially heavier crush depth. An accidental detonation isn't a concern at all, for reasons already given, but someone managing to recover it (or more accurately, the nuclear material within it since all the parts to make it go boom have probably been pretty corroded) is. Particularly a number of weapons lost in the 1950s and 60s, before anti-theft/safety features like PALs were installed.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
This does assume that 1) they can find the weapons and 2) that the weapons are useable.

I do think people worrying about nukes is a lot of worry over something that's most likely not going to happen in BelaBatt. By all means, have your nuke abyssals, but they won't be a thing in BelaBatt (at least, as far as I can see).
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top